Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Limit Texas Hold'em > Mid- and High-Stakes Hold'em
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 12-09-2004, 12:54 PM
Clarkmeister Clarkmeister is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,247
Default Re: Analysis

[ QUOTE ]
Calling is more profitable in a tight game than in a loose game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not necessarily. It is, however, more profitable in an aggressive game than in a passive game.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 12-09-2004, 04:15 PM
mmcd mmcd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 441
Default Re: Analysis

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Calling is more profitable in a tight game than in a loose game.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a dangerous generalization. Sometimes this statement is completely false. It entirely depends on your hand and the texture of the game.

Maybe instead of replying with a one line rule of thumb in an attempt to retort my entire post that contains objective evidence from my simulator that is relevant to the post, you could actually put something with thought.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's the problem in a loose game:

You could be up against: AA, KK, QQ, JJ, TT, 99, 88, 77, 55 44, AK, AQ ,AJ, AT, Ax, KQ, KJ, JTs, T9s, 98s, random rags, etc. Obviously the capper probably has a stronger hand than the the 3-bettor, but I've seen people cap suited trash plenty before in loose games. The problem is that you won't know where you are at, so depending on your opponents and the board, you might have to see a showdown w/o a set. When you do flop a set, if they have AK AQ KQ or whatever rather than AA KK QQ, you're not gonna be able to get 4-bets in on the turn. At some point (probably relatively early in the hand) their aggression will die out with overcards and they'll just call down.


Now, in a tighter game, you may very well be ahead of the 3-bettor: AK, AQ, etc. but the capper almost certainly has you beat w/ AA/KK/QQ. Now you fold with a clear conscience when you don't flop a set, and when you do, you're going to get a jammed pot unless the player with the overpair is extremely passive.

Sort of like the theory of poker. Would you rather play 66 against an opponent who could have: AA KK QQ JJ TT 99 88 77 55 44 AK AQ AJ AT KQs KJs and a few other random hands thrown in, or an opponent who you know has either AA or KK?
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 12-09-2004, 07:25 PM
Nightwish Nightwish is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 182
Default Re: huge hands sure

This is silly. The pot is offering our hero 5:1. That is enough in implied odds even if the opponents have AA and KK. The key in this hand is being able to fold when you don't flop your set (actually, you can call and fold the turn if the flop action is check-bet-call). If you can't do this, don't play this hand (and don't play poker).
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 12-09-2004, 07:45 PM
Ralph Wiggum Ralph Wiggum is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Springfield \"Was president Lincoln okay?\"
Posts: 149
Default Re: Typical preflop situation

Call it quickly or call it slowly? I can't decide either.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 12-10-2004, 07:09 AM
blubster blubster is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 71
Default Re: Typical preflop situation

[ QUOTE ]
And an increase in witrate remains several changes of state-of-mind away.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not worried about an increase in winrate. Well over 3BB/100 is fine with me

blubster
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.